EH3I 
Mi 



£0\ SPEECH 



HON. S. IAYALL, OF MAINE 



FINANCIAL AND TERRITORIAL POLICY OF THE ADMINISTRATION. 



DELIVERED 



IN 



THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES, JANUARY 2, 1855. 



WASHINGTON: 

PRINTED AT THE CONGRESSIONAL GLOBE OFFICE. 



EA3\ 



SPEECH. 



The House being in the Committee of the Whole 
on the state of the Union — 

Mr. MAYALL said: 

Mr. Chairman: I desire to make a few remarks, 
first, in relation to the financial policy of the Ad- 
ministration, and secondly in regard to its territo- 
rial policy. 

Before entering upon a general discussion of 
the financial policy of the Administration, I will 
read that portion of the President's message re- 
lating to the treaty which was made between the 
North American British Provinces upon the one 
part, and the United States of America upon the 
other, during the last session of Congress: 

< ; Since the adjournment of Congress, the ratifications of 
the treaty between the United States and Great Britain, 
relative to coast fisheries, and to reciprocal trade with the 
British North American provinces, have been exchanged, 
and some of its anticipated advantages are already enjoyed 
by us, although its full execution was to abide certain acts 
of legislation not yet fully performed. So soon as it was 
ratified, Great Britain opened to our commerce the free 
navigation of the river St. Lawrence, and to our fishermen 
unmolested access to the shores and bays, from which they 
had been previously excluded, on the coasts of her North 
American provinces ; in return for which, she asked for 
the introduction, free of duty, into the ports of the United 
States, of the fish caught on the same coast by British fish- 
ermen. This being the compensation, stipulated in the 
treaty, for privileges of the highest importance and value 
to the United States, which were thus voluntarily yielded 
before it became effective, the request seemed to me to be 
a reasonable one; but it could not be acceded to, from want 
of authority to suspend our laws imposing duties upon all 
foreign fish. 

" In the mean time, the Treasury Department issued a 
regulation, for ascertaining the duties paid or secured by 
bonds on fish caught on the coasts of the British provinces, 
and brought to our markets by British subjects, after the 
fishing grounds had been made fully accessible to the citi- 
zens of the United States. I recommend to your favorable 
consideration a proposition, which will be submitted to 
you, for authority to refund the duties and cancel the bonds 
thus received. The provinces of Canada and New Bruns- 
wick have also anticipated the full operation of the treaty, 
by legislative arrangements, respectively, to admit, free of 
duty, the products of the United States mentioned in the 
free list of the treaty; and an arrangement, similar to that 
regarding British fish, has been made for duties now charge- 
able on the products of those provinces enumerated in the 
same free list, and introduced therefrom into the United 
States; a proposition for refunding which will, in my judg- 
ment, be in like manner entitled to your favorable consider- 
ation." 

Although my views do not comport with the 
views expressed by the President in relation to the 



reciprocity treaty, I would not have any one infer, 
therefore, that I am opposed to free trade between 
the North American British Provinces, on the 
one hand, and the United States on the other. I 
have been long of the opinion that a free, mutual, 
and independent reciprocation of the agricultural 
productions and manufactured articles in both 
countries would result alike advantageously to the 
interests of both. Upon an examination of the 
articles imported in 1851 and 1852, named in the 
schedule of the treaty, I find the balance of trade 
in these articles is more than five hundred per 
centum against us. Hence I am decidedly of the 
opinion that the treaty, as it now stands, in its 
practical effect and operation, has resulted advan- 
tageously to the interests of the British Provinces, 
and, upon the other hand, to the destruction of 
American interests. 

In order to explain my meaning in relation to 
this point, I will suppose, for instance, that the 
United States propose and enter into a treaty with 
Great Britain, in certain specific articles raised 
here in our own country, and that we are to have 
reciprocity of trade with Great Britain in cotton, 
rice, tobacco, corn, flour, beef, pork, butter, 
cheese — a system which would, in fact, include all 
the agricultural productions of the United States 
which are articles of exportation. Take it for 
granted that Great Britain enters into a treaty with 
the Government of the United States in relation to 
these articles. Here would be a treaty resulting 
directly for the interests of the United States, and 
against those of Great Britain. The treaty be- 
tween the Provinces and the United States pro- 
duces precisely the same effects in relation to the 
interests of this country. I propose to avoid the 
evils resulting from such atreaty.toagreat extent. 
1 have prepared a bill, providing for full and legiti- 
mate free trade between the Canadas and the 
States. 

The bill which I intend to introduce provides,, 
that whenever the Government of Great Britain 
shall agree with that of the United States to admit 
certain articles of American produce or manu- 
facture therein enumerated, duty free, into the 
British Provinces, the same articles produced or 
manufactured by the British Provinces shall be 
admitted into this country also duty free. The 
articles enumerated consist of manufactures from. 



£tt^&^tes»\^sr**&* 



tiny j •*•■** «■- — - 

paplVr m«hi-; wood ike., also i;^^^^ep r oSn^o?S^Ah: 
prepared" meats, Vegetables, animal oils, pain s ; [«™ «P™ 8 the y ffectof reciprocal free trade in 
gX&c; so that There will be an equal encour- 1| ««HS.» ™ een tne Umt / d States and Great 



, |1 of commercial freedom. 

marble, paper, papier mache, wood, &c, aiso 

• P Teats, vegetables, animal oils, paints, 

so that there will be an equal encour- 

ven to the manufactures of this country 

firm in* interests of the Provinces— 

"Interest of those Provinces , to |= ^^H^o ur^ipsVrom the .ocean 
anufactures in return for their agncu - ,j fore.g trade a iMtead f witness- 

tural productions, and thus making the ft ^™"- 1! SAKedicli calamity, we.behold our com- 
cial intercourse truly reciprocal, and not merely , Jf™^ di our 8aila whitening every sea. 




mak 

take our m 



S^dSn^Indthus making the -»»- ii^^S! c ^ "calamity we.behold our com- 
cial intercourse truly reciprocal, and not merely , m f r £\| ding> our sal |s whitening every sea, 

n TS y p^ions of this bill are much longer \?~>*^^^S&W 

resisted fy statute, they will t"umph .n -pile o to th convey ^ ^ d 

statute The lelative position of the two countries , lavoi , shared, and successfully 

Shdr" business connectione-necessarily compe | ^^^ Bntam in markets, 

the practice of free trade. The steam car, swifter ; £™P e W h were before wholly excluded 



ystem in the history 01 ine p«i, »"»--i 

desideratum. «...c auj , — - ., . „ ,, individual who is so completely destitute ui 

the heart of the Provinces, from Maine, Massa- the ™<"™» f patriotic pride as not to rejoice 
chuseUsYand New York, and stil other lines are everj fg«g^g commercial freedom, and to 
in progress or contemplation which when com- **£JJ*J of oj , 

pleledfwill have a direct .tendency, and, . n | fact wc » pj,^ ^ ^ ^'^l. 

will superinduce reciprocity, in BPite of i all the ™>« now consent to return to the old 

artificial barriers that unwise legislation can pile « oboa y in nav i ga tion; the same wdl be 

up to thwart its peaceful and beneficent progress | restnc i v , s y w ith free trade with the Prov- 

tW provisions of this bill will then be carried j found to be lhe ca f e ; ,. our comme rce, and 
So JraS effect. The effect of unrest ncted i> ce.. In. J^ »f mpj ^ h , f 

' „L,.,p hPtween this country and these Prov- injuring "Hb. f theother In 



of 



Maine being ruined , or even injured , in the sngnieM 
decree by all the additions which the concen rated 
tfoTof a 7 ., the Provinces employed in ship-buiU- 



and ES^l^*^- «"d unalterable 
cumnto? trade must make the Provinces tributary 
to us, rather than ourselves tributary to tnem. B eriu»ui»» .«.,.-,,;- 

No State in the Union is so vitally interested n , abor ot ^ stock of fce world. 

the question of free trade as Maine. She is equally mg * an m * K h beller ia the objection based on 
nte?ested with several other States, on account of An I how m ^ ^ is t0 lnjure the 

the railway connections with the Provinces. She I tne nyp ch Majne ]S deep] y 

La.so.mo y re deeply interes^^ 
aideration, being a border State « «J U ^ 
With the 



situated. 



Eel' States and the* British Provinces, will || brought mto competitio i.^ ^ ^^ of thiB 



"" nractl 1 bueiS - prove, the fallacy of this 
change the face of affairs, and give to .Main. a ™| g«*£ b^ ^ ^H „ rec , proca i 

central position in the world of commerce, a. g 




ana eminently central portion of tl is vmu ,, e. { ',.?,„ be bul K li.|,r . 
national highway of commerce, and w.l , eonse- wauie, ^^ ^ ^ mluce(] lo the St . 

nu.i.tly, derive all the advantages that her new J regio lribl , tnri es. The amount remaining 

SositioVwill confer upon her, which must be weal- John e *gJ™ theAndro8CO gg in , and the Kennebec, 
eulably great and valuable. . m _ M J i- acarcely eufficient to supply the rapid^increaB- 

Th« »idea that reciprocity will affeet unfavorably .'; r _..I.i r., r hnme consumption. The same 



,,. iprocity ■ 
of Industry in which Maine is more largely 
tereated than any other State in the Union. Such 



at any rate, that need protection-are, therefore, on I the Provinces. But I think I have proved con- 
the St. John and its tributaries. What was the clusively that it operates against the interest 
condition of the lumbering interest there before the "of the United States, as a whole; theie ore, ,1 
reciprocity treaty? Worse, infinitely worse, than ,, have called the attention of the House tc .the 
it can possibly be with reciprocity. The St. John " subject and prepared a bill, the proMS on ot 
is the only outlet. This river, or the mouth of it, is ;, which, if carried out, will result more advanta- 
within foreign jurisdiction. Ourlumber has to pass , geously to the interests of both count es, ana 
out of this river. In its transit it was subject to " place the United States on an equal footing with 
all manner of delays and pecuniary exactions, so , the Provinces. 

that lumber on the Maine side of the St. John The next movement to which I desne to , ca 1 
was not regarded as worth more than one half as] attention is, the repeal of the Missouri pronto - 
much as the same amount on the Penobscot. Let ! lion of slavery from Kansas and Nebraska. It 

was a compact rendered sacred by the circum- 
stances under which it was entered into, by time, 
and by the faithful observance of all statesmen of 
the past and the present generation, up to the 
commencement of the present Congress. 

At the last session of the previous Congress, a 
for almost every article manufactured in the United I bill was reported to this House by the Committee 
State -, and thereby give an impetus to that branch ,; on Territories, for organizing a g ov 7™ e "' ™? r *" 
. * . . y.o . __ i . , — . i* j„ „_ „ ,,c/^n t^> tha Mwuniir p.nmnromise. 



reciprocity of trade be established, under which we 
shall acquire the privilege of carrying our manu- 
factured articles into the Provinces, and the advant- 
ages resulting to the United States will be incal- 
culably great and valuable. It will furnish the 
manufacturers with a new and additional market 



?pnvea ot equality in iraue. ± uc j iuiuh,bi|i->— --■ 

can bring all their productions to us, and we can- ' the Wilmot proviso was not embodied n the b U 
not carry anything in return to pay for them, \ The answer was then made to the House and he 
which their trade demands, without paying duty ; country, that slavery *** ^ty™ 1 "*'**?™. 
thereon | Missouri compromise, and that no repetition ol 

The very able report made by Mr. Andrews ' such exclusion would render it more valid. Sir, 
on colonial and lake trade, in 1852, furnishes an | no Democrat, no Whig then . dr * & ™**"Z"* 
abundance of evidence to prove this fact. From exclusion of slavery was unjust or «nc°n*tUu- 
this report I quote the following list of exports !| t.onal. No man, a that time dreamed that pop- 
from Canada to the United States, giving the | ular sovereignty," of which ^ w have : heard _ so 
principal articles and values, for the year 1851: | much consisted in the privilege of ho ding a cer- 
A«hP« .... $65,992 tam laboring portion of the population ot this 



Lumber'.'.'.'.'.".". '.'.'.'.■.*.*.'..!.'. 766,628 country in bondage— in the power to buy and sell 

Shingles 20 ' 73 ^ ii persons who happened to be unable to defend 

Caltleofall kinds and sizes 140,1-6 I 

Horses 185,848 

Wool 41,896 

Wheat 491,760 

Flour 1,181,484 

Barley and rve ?.->.;>'Jti 

Beans and peas ^,588 

Buuer:::::::;:::::.::::::::::::::::: &m 

E^s 38,008 

Unenunierated l,70o,664 



Total $4,921,084 

As can be seen by referring to table No. 9, in 
Canadian returns, the dutiable and free goods are j 
thus stated for the year 1851: 
Dutiable imports into Canada from the United I 

States $7,9/1,380 

Free imports into Canada from the United Slates. 1,147,368 , 

Total $9.118.768 ! 



from 

Wheat, (bushels) 870,889 value, $609,681 

Flour,(cwt.) 490,201 " l,°,°j3,928 

Rye, oats, &c, &c 



themselves from such treatment. The bill passed 
this body without opposition or objection on this 
point; and when it came up in the Senate, the 
Vice President declared his hostility to the bill on 
account of the territory to which it applied being 
free by reason of this Missouri prohibition, but 
declared, that so far as that objection was con- 
cerned, the bill might as well pass then as at any 
future day, for that prohibition of s'avery could 
never be repealed. The Senate heard these remarks, 
and assented to their correctness, so far as "silence 
gives consent;" for not a member expressed the 
least doubt of their perfect accuracy. Those grave 
and reverend Senators, who have since reasoned 
so profoundly upon "popular sovereignty," had 
not then discovered that it consisted in the priv- 
ilege of owning the bodies of their fellow creatures, 
born on the same soil; children, perhaps, of the 
same father; and nursed, it might be, by the same 
Total quantity imported into the United States 1 hands; but now, the right to buy and sell human 
jm Canada, for the year ending June 30, 1852: | flesh is called "popular sovereignty. , 

But, sir, it would appear that the Administra- 
tion were not remiss in looking into the question 
of popular sovereignty. The bill repealing the 
prohibition of slavery, was brought forward by 
the friends of the Administration. It was urged 
The above table proves conclusively that all the ' upon the Senate and the House by the leaders of 
articles which the Provinces export come in free ; the President's party. (I will notcall them Dem- 
of duty; for all the articles are named in the ocrats.") The President's organ in this city, was 
schedule of the treaty, viz: "Grain, flour, and constant and unceasing in its exhortations i to pass 
breadstuff* of all kinds; animals of all kinds; , that bill, promising, that if once passed, ,t would 



203,570 



Total $1,80-2,17 




Igm treaty 
because Maine has to buy largely, for her own 
consumption, such articles as are exported from 



lions with the best men and greatest statesmen, 
and patriots of our nation. But the popular mind 



6 



of the North was regarded with contempt; the will 
of the people was spurned by the Administration, 
and these sincere advocates of " popular sover- 1 
eignty," and the repeal of the Missouri compro- ! 
mise was insisted on. Here, in this Hall, we 
were told that the President desired the passage of 
that measure, and Representatives were threatened 
with political excommunication if they did not 
aid the Administration in carrying out this policy. 
The object was attained; the bill passed; slavery 
was admitted into Kansas and Nebraska. 

Mr. Chairman, had the repeal of the Mis- ] 
eouri compromise been fairly placed before the 
people, the result would have been widely dif- , 
ferent. It was smuggled through Congress in a 
most unjustifiable manner. Had it been known ' 
that Mr. Pierce was in favor of the repeal, he j 
would not now have been an occupant of the 
"White House. He had my cordial support, and 
I exulted with thousands of others in his triumph- j 
ant election; but the passage of that bill has scat- 
tered the party that sustained him to the four j 
winds. His opposers grasped this new issue 
with avidity, and they will follow it up to the 
last extremity. The excitement on the slavery 
question had begun to subside. The East, the j 
West, the North, and the South, were at peace 
on that subject. None desired to revive an agita- 
tion so detrimental to commerce, and to the peaceful 
pursuits of industry. The President's promises 
in his inaugural had given hope that this quiet 
would be preserved throughout the continuance 
of his administration in power. The hatred of 
slavery, naturally strong in the northern mind, 
was in repose when this firebrand was thrown 
into combustibles that would otherwise have re- 
mained inert, and it has kindled a fire that cannot 
now be extinguished. And this was done by the 
immediate friends, and with not only the marked 
approval, but also with the strenuous efforts of 
the present Administration. 

There was no immediate call for the establish- 
ment of a territorial government in Kanzas and 
Nebraska. Events have shown since, that the 
object of the abettors of that bill was to avail them- 
selves of the then condition of Congress, that they 
might pass through the repeal for the purpose of 
introducing slavery into that immense territory. 
A more impolitic course could not have been pur- 
sued, even by the South. In all probability there 
never will be another slave State admitted into this 
Union. If a compromise that had stood for a third 
of a century, that had become sacred by age, that 
the people looked upon as permanent, could be so 
easily Bet aside, is it reasonable to suppose that 
there will ever be another? Such faithless, un- 
principled combinations are not to be trusted. 
Why do the people of the South wish to ex- 
tend their " peculiar institution " into free terri- 
tory ? They, themselves, are not so disingenious 
as to deny that it is an evil — and a great evil — and 
yet they not only refuse to rid themselves of it, 
but show an intemperate zeal to extend the evil 
to others. The institution of slavery, they say, 
is handed down from their ancestors. They find 
themselves entrammeled with it, and cannot safely 
extricate themselves from it at once. The gentle- 
man says his finer sensibility dots not reproach 
Lim, as it is an evil that did nut originate in him- 
self; thul he does not sin prrse, (of himself,) tin iugh 

he holds human beings in bondage. Well for 
them that they have something to console them, 
and ease theupbraidingsof their consciences ! Let 
us suppose the gentlemun to possess a hereditary 



contagious disease. This may be said to be a 
misfortune, but no crime. But, supposing he is 
zealous and active in communicating this distem- 
per to others, can it then be said that he does not 
sin per se ? 

The immortal Washington and Jefferson did 
not desire the extension of slavery. The framers 
{ of our Constitution were aware that the institution 
was incompatible with the declaration of rights. I 
am sorry to say there is a change for the worse since 
their day. Many who pretend to be the admirers 
of those illustrious characters, are now striving not 
only to have the baneful institution established in 
pei-peluo, but to extend it as far as possible. God 
deliver us from such spurious Democracy ! These 
men threaten to dissolve the Union if they are 
prevented from carrying out their base designs. 
Our Executive possesses almost unlimited power 
to arrest their effecting so nefarious a purpose. 
They dare not, they cannot do it. Look at the 
inevitable consequences of their forming a sepa- 
rate Confederacy. Such an event would not only 
be the means of liberating their slaves, but the 
very lives of the leaders of so foolish a project 
would be sacrificed. The Union will, at all haz- 
ards, be preserved. Greece might have given 
laws to the whole eastern world, but she wasted 
her energies in civil strife. The monarchs of the 
Old World are expecting us to accomplish what 
they cannot effect. They will be disappointed 
in their hopes. An attempt to separate this Union 
will be crushed in the bud. I have no fears on 
that ground. Northern statesmen have too long 
succumbed to the unreasonable demands of south- 
ern politicians. The time has arrived to stop 
them in their encroachments. 

Look at the fugitive slave law — a law that can- 
not be enforced, except by resorting to the most 
desperate means. I cannot go into the merits, or 
rather the demerits, of this law. Thefourth article, 
third section, of the Constitution, gives no coun- 
tenance to this arbitrary law. The great city of 
Boston came nigh being deluged in blood in the 
case of the rendition of Burns. Let the slave 
States adopt some means of keeping their slaves, 
or liberate them. It certainly is not reasonable 
, to make slave catchers of the people of the East 
: and West; and to repeal the fugitive slave act will 
be the work of the next Congress. 

Sir, the complaint which I makeof the Admin- 
istration is this: that it should pursue a line of 
policy, and recommend measures to Congress, 
which every one must know are perfiectly ob- 
noxious and contrary to the sentiments of the 
people, and then call upon the Democratic party 
in Congress to pass them through without a con- 
sultation. If the repeal of the Missouri compro- 
mise was to be forced through the House as a 
party measure, the Democratic members of Con- 
gress who were to take tlie responsibility between 
the Administration and the people, should have 
been called together in caucus, and tl e subject 
fully and fairly discussed ; and tvirv I '< mocratic. 
member, however humble, was entitled to have a 
hearing in relation to a measure on W hich would 

turn his political success or defeat. We all knew 
it was the members of this I louse " on whom the 
tower in Siloaui" WSJ to fall. Ilence we were 
the most vitally interested. If the Administra- 
tion was ilitein ined to destroy iiself, it had no 
rii;ht to in ike a ilaugter-house of the whole Dem- 
I ocratie party- There were som< members on this 
floor who dul not desire to be beheaded by the 
effect of unwise and impolitic measures, forced 



upon us by the Administration against our own 
consent. The effect has been, and will be, that 
two thirds of the Democratic members on this 
floor are prostrated, politically, and, perhaps, for- 
ever. Who is responsible for the defeat of so 
many Democratic members, and the destruction of 
the Democratic party ? No earthly power but the 
Administration; and no man can deny it. 

My friend near me says I fought against the 
repeal severely, and he would like to know why 
I was not again returned. No matter for that, 
Mr. Chairman. It was " death in the pot" to a 
Democrat, whether he voted for or against that 
repeal. It is true, I fought against the repeal of 
the Missouri compromise, assiduously, night and 
day. I spoke against it; I voted against it. I 
afterwards voted to suspend the rules to enable 
the gentleman from Massachusetts [Mr. Eliot] 
to introduce his bill for the repeal of the fugitive 
Blave law. I also voted to abolish the rations of 
spiritous liquors in the Navy. In all three of 
these positions which I took, and votes which I 
gave, I am confident I am sustained by the ap- 
proval of my constituents. The leading men of 
the Democratic party proper, treated me very 
handsomely, and were willing to place my name 
before the people, but I did not desire a nomina- 
tion. I thought that " discretion was the better 
part of valor," and that I would stand aloof from 
the present fused and confused state of political 
affairs. 

It is true, we all feel the force of the remarks 
made daily upon this floor, " that the Nebraska 
and Kansas question was no test in our congres- 
sional elections. If it had been, all the anti- 
Nebraska members would have been returned." 
My only reply to this is, my position is sustained 
if I am not returned. 

It is too apt to be the case, and is an evil which 
ought to be corrected, that the people of the North 
do not stand by those Representatives and Sen- 
ators who firmly stand by them. If the people 
would have their sentiments carried out in Con- 
gress, they should sustain the men who have the 
firmness and fixedness of purpose to carry them 
out. Let me say on this floor, it matters not to 
me if I am never returned to this Hall again, or if 
I never hold another political office in my life; I 
will act in conformity to my own honest convic- 
tion of right and duty on all questions, independ- 
ent of consequences and " the opinion of all man- 
kind." If 1 am charged with having deserted the 
ranks of the Democratic party, I reply I have 
stood firm to the principles of Democracy as I 
have always understood them; and if the leaders 
of the Democratic party and the Administration 
have proved themselves recreant to those princi- 
ples, as I am certain they have, I throw back the 
charge of desertion, and declare that it is they 
who have been unfaithful to the trust reposed in 
them by a confiding people; unfaithful to the prin- 
ciples on which they were elected; unfaithful to 
the great principles of human rights, on which 
all true Democracy is founded; unfaithful to the 

Fromises made on their coming into office, and, as 
have remained true in all these particulars, there 
is, necessarily, a separation for which they alone 
are responsible. 

Mr. Chairman , having answered the gentleman , 
I trust to his satisfaction, I will now return to 
my point. There never was an Administration 
that came into office under more favorable cir- 
cumstances than the present. It does seem to me 
hat it was the part of wisdom for the Adminis- 



(ration to have pursued a line of policy consistent 
with its professed principles, reflecting, in their 
system of legislation, the will of the great American 
people, which would have rendered it one of the 
most popular Administrations since the organiza- 
tion of the Government. Then the Democratic 
members on this floor would have been returned 
to the Thirty-Fourth Congress, and the Demo- 
cratic party would have been the great absorbing 
party of the Union. 

Had the southern delegation on this floor fol- 
lowed the judicious advice and noble example of 
some of its most distinguished members — the gen- 
tleman from Missouri, [Mr. Benton;] the gentle- 
man from Louisiana, [Mr. Hunt;] the gentlemen 
from Tennessee, [Messrs. Cullom and Ether- 
idge;] and the gentleman from Virginia, [Mr. 
Millson] — by whose wise and patriotic course 
they have stamped their characters upon the age 
in which they live, and have erected enduring 
monuments in the hearts of the American people, 
they would have taken a bold stand against this 
unwise policy of the Administration, and they 
would have maintained the Missouri compromise 
as a compact with the North. Had they done this, 
they would have perpetuated the confidence in the 
honor and integrity of the South which then ex- 
isted; the repeal of the fugitive slave act would not 
have been contemplated; and all parts of this Union 
would have been cemented together as becometh 
one people — one nation. But they did not do this. 
It is now too late ! The mere reenactment of the 
Missouri compromise will not appease the right- 
teous indignation of the northern people. They 
have lost all faith in compromises with slavery 
and slaveholders, and nothing short of repealing 
the fugitive slave act; the removal of .slavery from 
the District of Columbia; the entire dissolution 
of the Federal Government from all connection 
with slavery;— will restore that unanimity of feel- 
ing which existed in this country previous to the 
repeal of the Missouri compromise. 

Every effort was made to avoid the responsi- 
bility of thus opening these Territories to slavery. 
The people were told that slavery would not be 
carried there if the prohibition were repealed. 
After the deed was done, during the late canvass 
in various northern States, the friends of the 
Administration endeavored to carry out their pre- 
tensions in favor of liberty by insisting that there 
would be no slavery there. This appears to have 
been a suitable finale of the deception. Even 
while these pretensions were being put forth, we 
saw, published in the newspapers, the prices of 
certain laborers, mechanics, and other inhabitants 
of these newly organized Territories. By the aid 
of the Administration, the slave-dealers were then 
trafficing in a defenseless part of the population. 
The excitement on the slave question has increased 
and swallowed up all others. It now wholly 
absorbs the popular mind. In these attempts to 
silence agitation, the President has shown himself 
wholly incompetent to judge of the popular feeling, 
and the people no longer confide in his ability to 
conduct the Government. 

Now, sir, the North has taken its position. You 
have repealed the Missouri compromise. It was 
the basis of all legislative compromises. With it, 
all others fall; and so far as the free States are 
concerned, they are under no obligation whatever 
to retain any act of Congress passed for the ben- 
efit of slavery. Indeed, every moral obligation 
now rests upon them to repeal immediately so 
much of the statute of 1807 as authorizes the coast- 



3 



wise slave trade. As the South have refused to 
permit freedom to exist in Kansas and Nebraska, 
will they insist, or have they the effrontery to 
ask, northern men to protect their traffic in our 
common humanity? "Non-intervention," was 
the cry of the Administration and the South last 
year; and shall not the next Congress reiterate the 
watchword when asked to withdraw the protec- 
tion of our flag to that revolting trade? Will any 
one contend that we are bound to protect this 
traffic on the high seas, and discard all protection 
to freedom in our Territories? No, sir. The 
cry of " popular sovereignty " will be repeated in 
the next Congress, when the proposition to repeal 
the statute authorizing the coastwise slave trade 
shall come up for consideration. Let the people 
who are shipped on board our vessels for the slave 
markets of the South, shape their own domestic 
institutions. Congress ought not to interfere. Let 
them cast the slave-traders into the briny deep; 
Congress will not legislate slavery on board Amer- 
ican vessels. Will not the North hold the chalice 
of " non-intervention " and " popular sover- 
eignty " to southern lips? I am aware that the 
withdrawal of our protection from this unhallowed 
commerce will seriously affect the vital interests of 
the slave-growing States. Their principal com- 
merce consists in buying and selling human be- 
ings. These are their principal productions, their 
staple commodities, on which their prosperity 
depends. I think we are now prepared to adopt 
the doctrine of " non-intervention," so far as that 
commerce is concerned. Let those people be in- 
vested with the rights of " popular sovereignty;" 
and, while on board our ships upon the high seas, 
we will permit them to go voluntarily to the bar- 
racoons of the South, or to take possession of the 
slave-dealers and carry them to the slave marts of 
Africa. Let them enslave and sell their masters, 
or submit to be sold by them. 

When the proposition comes up to repeal those 
laws of the United States which authorize, en- 
courage, or sustain the slave trade and slavery 
in the District of Columbia, will the South inter- 
pose any objection ? Will they repudiate the doc- 1 
trine of " non-intervention?" Shall we withdraw 
the protection of Congress to freedom in Nebraska j 
and Kansas, and continue protection to the slave 
trade and slavery in the District of Columbia? 
Has this motto of "non-intervention" a local 
application, suited to particular degrees of longi-j 
tude? Shall we support oppression and the rais- 
ing of human beings for market in this city, and 
withdraw our protection of liberty in Kansas and 
Nebraska? 

Mr. Chairman, the people of the free States are 
aroused. They have shaken off the lethargy 
which has so long rested upon them. They are 
prepared to grapple with this question of slavery, 
and to wipe away the stain from the Federal Gov- 
ernment. No magic wand will again pass over 
them, lulling them to quiet repose, while southern 
Oppression ^luill wind its meshes about the limbs j 
of the northern giant. Our .Sampson will not be 
seduced to sleep on the lap of effeminate servility, 
while she shaves from him the locks in which his 
great , , . j r; this Federal Govern 

rnent must be divorced from all support of th< 
"pecu "" We will wash our hands! 



— "ssion, purify ourselves 



1RY 



of 




from the stains of 
from its iniquities, 
i moral and political 
liberty, so far as wer 

The people of th 

send members her' 

The time is near • 

' elected from any f 

! porting the principu 

Then, too, we shall eschew ~ 
new slave States. Should Kansas 
admission with a slaveholding constitution, she 
will not be admitted to this political copartnership. 
'< We will not receive her into our firm. Should 
she ask us to admit her with the advantages over 
us of having three votes for every five slaves; or, 
in other words, should she ask us to receive her 
into the Union, giving to the holder of five slaves 
the same influence and power in the Government 
which four of our intelligent lovers of liberty pos- 
sess, we will discard and repudiate the dishonor- 
able proposition. No, sir; if she enters this 
Union she must come with the same rights which 
we ourselves possess. We will not degrade our- 
selves by admitting her with superior advantages 
which would dishonor and degrade every freeman 
of the North. Our motto shall be non-interven- 
tion in favor of slavery; popular sovereignty for 
the North as well as the South; and we intend this 
popular sovereignty shall be exerted by the North 
and acknowledged by the South. 

This, then, is our position. We have been 
driven to it by the Administration. We have 
been compelled to take it in order to our self-de- 
fense — to protect our own honor, our own rights. 
From my early manhood I have been connected 
with the Democratic party. It was my pride and 
my pleasure to act with them while they acted 
upon Democratic principles; but when, under the 
leadership of Mr. Pierce, they turned their efforts, 
and prostituted their influence to extend slavery, 
to increase its evils, to open up slave markets on 
soil which, for more than a generation, had been 
consecrated expressly to freedom,! could not, I 
would notgo with them. They set at defiance the 
popular will, repudiated the doctrines of our fathers, 
who declared all men to be endowed with inalien- 
able rights to life, liberty, and the pursuit of 
happiness; and instead of wielding the powers of 
Government to secure these rights, the present 
Administration have wielded those powers to 
remove that security which had been thrown 
around the people of Nebraska and Kansas by 
the Congress of 1820. 

The people of the whole North, and of the 
South, also, if true to constitutional liberty, true 
to themselves, true to the progressive sentiments 
of the a^e in which we live, will hereafter see 
that the powers of this Federal Government shall 
be wielded for freedom— to promote the objects 
for which it was originally intended — the happi- 
ness and progress of mankind. We shall, if 
true to these objects, make no more compromises. 
We will carry out the Constitution, giving to 
all its parts such construction as will " promote 
union, establish justice, insure domestic tranquil- 
lity, promote thp general well cure the 
of liberty to ull the people " under our 
exclusive jurisdiction. 






f^/ 



LIBRARY OF CONGRESS 



011897 777 4 * 



